Pasty Madness Options

[sanitynotincluded]

Is it just me, or does anyone else object to being treated as a moron by the BBC?

I have no objection to considering the extension of VAT to hot pasties, sausage rolls et c. on its merits, indeed I am more than a little sympathetic to the criticism, but the BBC are trotting out this ridiculous notion ( except for Engelbert's pile of shit you hear little else on radio two) that it is somehow too difficult for shops to decide whether they have sold a hot or a cold devonian pasty.

We managed to establish that Jaffa Cakes are non vatable without the world coming to an end, so why should it be any harder for a shop to determine whether it has heated said iitem since it was baked or taken measures to keep it hot if baked on site. Do the beeb think that we're stupid enough to fall for it? (are we indeed stupid enough to fall for it?) or are they just desperate?

[Parsifal]

It's no secret that the majority of the public are indeed a bunch of morons.
How else could Fox News survive?

[Dark_ph0enix]

Just put a 10% levy on all unhealthy food. Seems like the easiest solution. Especially in a country where the average waist size is nearly 38"

[ezra_z]

Just put a 10% levy on all unhealthy food. Seems like the easiest solution. Especially in a country where the average waist size is nearly 38"

Great idea mr. nanny-state! food is so damn cheap right now and getting cheaper and we totally aren't paying enough tax. /sarc

[Dark_ph0enix]

Just put a 10% levy on all unhealthy food. Seems like the easiest solution. Especially in a country where the average waist size is nearly 38"

Great idea mr. nanny-state! food is so damn cheap right now and getting cheaper and we totally aren't paying enough tax. /sarc

Actually food is "so damn cheap right now" I eat more than three meals per day, not including the 1L of soup I make, for less than £1.40 per day. A bag of chips and a pastie from my local fish 'n' chip shop costs around £3.00

Of course I make my own meals, using healthy foods / raw ingredients, which is perhaps why, despite noticing the fact that food costs have indeed gone up, I can still quite comfortably buy enough food to feed myself for a week, for the cost of a couple of take aways.

[CyanIsland]

I don't even read the BBC news site anymore, it's more left wing than The Guardian, for Christ's sake! I expect absolute neutrality with my TV licence, but we're certainly not getting that at the moment.

Of course I make my own meals, using healthy foods / raw ingredients, which is perhaps why, despite noticing the fact that food costs have indeed gone up, I can still quite comfortably buy enough food to feed myself for a week, for the cost of a couple of take aways.

Quite. Planning ahead with healthy meals is the sensible thing to do and is perfectly affordable.

This post has been edited by CyanIsland: Mar 29 2012, 20:09

[naughtiesrival]

Is it just me, or does anyone else object to being treated as a moron by the BBC?

I have no objection to considering the extension of VAT to hot pasties, sausage rolls et c. on its merits, indeed I am more than a little sympathetic to the criticism, but the BBC are trotting out this ridiculous notion ( except for Engelbert's pile of shit you hear little else on radio two) that it is somehow too difficult for shops to decide whether they have sold a hot or a cold devonian pasty.

We managed to establish that Jaffa Cakes are non vatable without the world coming to an end, so why should it be any harder for a shop to determine whether it has heated said iitem since it was baked or taken measures to keep it hot if baked on site. Do the beeb think that we're stupid enough to fall for it? (are we indeed stupid enough to fall for it?) or are they just desperate?

Are you joking, Jaffa cakes and M&S tea cakes went through about 7 different court cases over 15 years or so to come t o that conclusion. The issue here is the strong Gregg's lobbying effort and an attempt by Labour to stir up some action. The question of whether "ambient" food is treated the same as cold or hot is a valid question but probably should have been an administrative rather than political matter. Mpersonally, I think they are eaten in substitution for sandwiches, wraps and salads rather than hot take away and the change should not have been made.

[sanitynotincluded]

Are you joking, Jaffa cakes and M&S tea cakes went through about 7 different court cases over 15 years or so to come t o that conclusion.

That was rather my point. The matter was resolved without the world coming to an end, and with very little by way of confusion in the supermarket aisles.

The question of whether "ambient" food is treated the same as cold or hot is a valid question but probably should have been an administrative rather than political matter.

If HMRC issued guidance along the lines that if the shop had actively heated the item, or kept it hot then it applied and that if they had not taken any active steps to that end it didnot then it is relatively straight forward. In other words ovens, microwaves, heat lamps, heated cabinets et c. you pay it, left on a shelf in the sun and you don't. My complaint was not with questioning the wisdom of the policy (or the complete lack thereof) it was with the beebs attempts to suggest that the policy would lead to mass confusion in every bakery and convenience store from Bognor Regis to Pitlochry.

[Parsifal]

Eliminate VAT and you eliminate the confusion. (Ditto for sales taxes in the US.)
VAT and sales taxes are a tax on production and thus an inhibitor of production. Plus VAT and sales taxes are basically taxes on wage earners because wage earners pay a higher proportion of their income as those taxes than do (wealthy) folks whose income is overwhelmingly from unearned income (capital gains, dividends, interest). It's basically a tax on working folks. Best to get rid of it altogether and get rid of the confusion with it.

[stulancs]

I can see no reason why pasties should be excluded from the VAT that all other takeaways have to pay. And Newsnight devoted a whole item with discussion about whether David Cameron has ever eaten one. I wonder how much that cost the licence payer.

[naughtiesrival]

Are you joking, Jaffa cakes and M&S tea cakes went through about 7 different court cases over 15 years or so to come t o that conclusion.

That was rather my point. The matter was resolved without the world coming to an end, and with very little by way of confusion in the supermarket aisles.

The question of whether "ambient" food is treated the same as cold or hot is a valid question but probably should have been an administrative rather than political matter.

If HMRC issued guidance along the lines that if the shop had actively heated the item, or kept it hot then it applied and that if they had not taken any active steps to that end it didnot then it is relatively straight forward. In other words ovens, microwaves, heat lamps, heated cabinets et c. you pay it, left on a shelf in the sun and you don't. My complaint was not with questioning the wisdom of the policy (or the complete lack thereof) it was with the beebs attempts to suggest that the policy would lead to mass confusion in every bakery and convenience store from Bognor Regis to Pitlochry.

On the Jaffa/tea cakes, iirc the VAT was collected all along and when the retailers won, the VAT previously collected was retained the gov't on the grounds of unjust enrichment. While the world didn't come to an end, the wrong amount of VAT was charged and the consumer lost out. Maybe not confusion but certainly unfair.

Eliminate VAT and you eliminate the confusion. (Ditto for sales taxes in the US.)
VAT and sales taxes are a tax on production and thus an inhibitor of production. Plus VAT and sales taxes are basically taxes on wage earners because wage earners pay a higher proportion of their income as those taxes than do (wealthy) folks whose income is overwhelmingly from unearned income (capital gains, dividends, interest). It's basically a tax on working folks. Best to get rid of it altogether and get rid of the confusion with it.

Most food is exempt from VAT across the EU, what is subject to VAT are "luxury" items such as hot takeaway and food eaten at the point of supply; this is why a UK Starbucks must show two prices for your blueberry muffin.

Some studies have shown that VAT more proportionately hits those who consume luxury goods and who frequently change cars or buy more expensive cars. It being regarded as regressive or borne by lower income groups is often not borne out by evidence.

[Parsifal]

Some studies have shown that VAT more proportionately hits those who consume luxury goods and who frequently change cars or buy more expensive cars. It being regarded as regressive or borne by lower income groups is often not borne out by evidence.

Then you have a different situation in the UK with VAT than we have here in the US with sales tax (which varies from state to state as well as communities within states). In this country wage earners spend a larger proportion of their income on consumption than do the wealthy. In NYC most food purchased in supermarkets and other food retailers for takeaway is not taxed, but many foods are (e.g. prepared foods and imported items and an odd assortment of other food items) as well as everything else you spend your money on (except drug prescriptions).

However, you might want to look into who did those studies and the methodology used. It can make a difference. After all, for decades "independent" researchers (paid by tobacco companies) showed that smoking cigaretts did not cause lung cancer. For example, are those studies measuring "proportion of income" or "total money spent per houshold", two very different metrics.

This post has been edited by ParsifalNYC: Mar 30 2012, 21:32

[Parsifal]

So this is what it's all about?

A Tax on Snacks Aggravates Austerity Tensions in Britain
By LANDON THOMAS Jr.
Published: March 29, 2012

LONDON — George Osborne, the posh chancellor of the Exchequer, confesses he cannot recall the last time he partook of a pasty, the calorie-busting savory pastry, served hot, that is beloved by millions of average Britons.

That may well explain why Mr. Osborne’s recent decision to impose a sales tax of 20 percent on pasties and other takeout snacks — while cutting the top income tax rate on financiers and other highly paid Britons — has created such a furor here.

The tax controversy, which the British press has called, inevitably, “Pasty-gate,” has come to symbolize the increasingly vitriolic debate in Britain over who should shoulder the burden of the government’s drive to cut debt and spending.

The tax has ignited a political firestorm, prompting even generally pro-government tabloid newspapers to attack it and leading the equally posh British prime minister, David Cameron, to claim — not all that convincingly — that he, truly, is an aficionado of the pasty (which rhymes with nasty).

The issue has also revived memories of the poll tax and other unpopular measures imposed by previous Conservative Party-led governments that left many Britons feeling that their leaders were out of touch.

The new tax, announced last week as part of the government’s austerity budget, was aimed at closing a loophole that exempted hot, freshly baked takeout foods, like pasties, pies, toasted sandwiches and rotisserie chickens, from the point-of-sale tax known in Britain as the value-added tax. Under the new budget, which effectively becomes law immediately, the price of such items will henceforth include a value-added tax of 20 percent.

Until now, the coalition government led by Mr. Cameron’s Conservative Party has made a strong case that, in light of a budget deficit of more than 10 percent of gross domestic product, Britain has no choice but to embark on one of the most severe austerity regimes in Europe.

Leading the charge has been Mr. Osborne, Mr. Cameron’s close friend and top political adviser, whose social pedigree in class-obsessed Britain is among the more refined in Parliament. An Oxford graduate, like Mr. Cameron, Mr. Osborne stands to inherit the title of baronet from his father.

As the economy continues to sag, Mr. Osborne’s clarion call that “we are all in this together” is beginning to ring hollow for a British public battered by high gasoline prices, a dormant job market and, now, more expensive pasties.

On Thursday, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development predicted that the British economy would experience its second consecutive quarter of contraction this spring, putting the economy back in a recession.

According to a YouGov poll that was released Thursday, Mr. Cameron’s government would get only 33 percent of the popular vote if an election were held now, compared with 43 percent for the opposition Labour Party. Mr. Cameron’s party won 36 percent of the vote in 2010. The next election must be held before May 7, 2015.

It has long been expected that the party in power would suffer political consequences as the public feels austerity’s bite. But Mr. Osborne has been betting that the prospect of economic recovery would be enough to convince voters that the current Conservative-led coalition government was better positioned than Labour to improve Britain’s parlous finances and make the economy more competitive on world markets.

That, in fact, was the stated impetus behind Mr. Osborne’s central budget measure: cutting the top tax rate to 45 percent from 50 percent. Many economists have supported such a rate cut as essential to attracting more investment and bolstering London’s claim to be world’s leading financial hub.

Mr. Osborne proposed to pay for the cut in part by increasing the fees that the wealthy pay when they buy and sell expensive properties in London.

Other revenue-raising measures, however, affected the middle class, including the scrapping of tax allowances for retirees — a change that was quickly labeled the granny tax — and the snack-food levy, perhaps forevermore known as the pasty tax.

Inflaming the debate is not only that the chancellor announced the tax, but how he has defended it.

At a parliamentary hearing Wednesday, Mr. Osborne was asked when he had last sampled a pasty at Greggs, a nationwide bakery chain that specializes in the delicacy.

The chancellor, who in public settings can come across as haughty in comparison with the more glib Mr. Cameron, scrambled for an appropriate response before acknowledging what, by then, had become obvious to all: he does not frequent the chain.

The British press, which delights in poking fun at the upper-class foibles of Mr. Osborne and Mr. Cameron, pounced. The Sun called on the government to reverse the pasty tax, and The Times published a list of Greggs outlets that it asserted would be most convenient for the busy chancellor to patronize.

At lunchtime Thursday at the closest shop on the Times list — less than a mile from Mr. Osborne’s residence in the Westminster area of central London — a line of civil servants, construction workers and others waited to pay 90 pence, or $1.43, for a sausage roll or £1.42 for a heartier steak bake.

Mike Henderson, a network engineer who calls himself a frequent Greggs customer, said he was not surprised that the chancellor was taking aim at low-budget snacks to raise money.

“This government does what it wants to do, and we have to follow,” he said. He added, “Don’t forget, these are the Tories. It’s history repeating itself.”

The dispute threatens to set back Mr. Cameron’s signature accomplishment as prime minister — detoxifying a political brand that in the post-Thatcher years had become closely linked with policies that favored the better-off.

Even if the bitterness over the pasty tax dissipates, the aftertaste of an out-of-touch government that looks out for its own could linger.

“We cannot all afford to pay £3 a day for a sandwich lunch,” Mr. Henderson said. “Here you can come in and get a cheese roll for 90 pence.”

The New York Times

Link

[CyanIsland]

Oh for God's sake! This stupid pasty drama compounded by the media is getting more ridiculous by the day! If this 20% increase puts a cheap and nasty, calorie-laden, fattening snack out of your budget, then make your own bloody lunch! That'll be cheaper and probably a fair bit healthier, too.

People are really pissing me off at the moment, what with this and the panic buying over a non-existent tanker strike!

[snowman]

Eliminate VAT and you eliminate the confusion. (Ditto for sales taxes in the US.)
VAT and sales taxes are a tax on production and thus an inhibitor of production. Plus VAT and sales taxes are basically taxes on wage earners because wage earners pay a higher proportion of their income as those taxes than do (wealthy) folks whose income is overwhelmingly from unearned income (capital gains, dividends, interest). It's basically a tax on working folks. Best to get rid of it altogether and get rid of the confusion with it. :great

It is not possible to get rid of VAT, as The Economist explains -

THE Tory tabloids are still seething about what they are calling the "pasty tax", or George Osborne's decision to end the VAT exemption on sausage rolls, pasties, freshly roasted chickens and the like that are sold hot over shop counters or in supermarkets, for munching elsewhere. The Sun devotes two pages to the question and a leader, and links to a petition got up by the National Association of Master Bakers, demanding that the tax break be re-instated.

They had better hurry. I blush to admit it, but five years covering the European Union left me quite the connoisseur of VAT rules (you lucky people). And VAT is a one-way ratchet of a tax, thanks to its role in funding the EU budget. Put simply, the EU doesn't like VAT exemptions or special low rates. It cannot do much about those that already exist, because tax rules are decided by unanimity among all 27 member countries. But if a national government ever gives up a national VAT exemption, it is gone forever (unless all 26 other member countries can be persuaded to show mercy).

Scanning the fine print of the 2012 budget, VAT is going to be slapped on hot shop-sold food from October 1st this year. After that date, I would point out, Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax (or barmy Brussels bureaucrats, to use the correct tabloid term) will be standing between Sun readers and any return to tax-free hot sausage rolls. That's not a fight I would care to witness.[/i]

[Parsifal]

Eliminate VAT and you eliminate the confusion. (Ditto for sales taxes in the US.)
VAT and sales taxes are a tax on production and thus an inhibitor of production. Plus VAT and sales taxes are basically taxes on wage earners because wage earners pay a higher proportion of their income as those taxes than do (wealthy) folks whose income is overwhelmingly from unearned income (capital gains, dividends, interest). It's basically a tax on working folks. Best to get rid of it altogether and get rid of the confusion with it.

It is not possible to get rid of VAT, as The Economist explains -

Thank you for the enlightenment.

I can only offer my condolences then.
In the states and cities in the US where we have a sales tax it is so ingrained into the public's consciousness (and states' and municipalities' budgets) that no one considers getting rid of this regressive tax. For the most part politicians aren't the wisest people.

[Kev]

Eliminate VAT and you eliminate the confusion. (Ditto for sales taxes in the US.)
VAT and sales taxes are a tax on production and thus an inhibitor of production. Plus VAT and sales taxes are basically taxes on wage earners because wage earners pay a higher proportion of their income as those taxes than do (wealthy) folks whose income is overwhelmingly from unearned income (capital gains, dividends, interest). It's basically a tax on working folks. Best to get rid of it altogether and get rid of the confusion with it.

It is not possible to get rid of VAT, as The Economist explains -

Thank you for the enlightenment.

I can only offer my condolences then.
In the states and cities in the US where we have a sales tax it is so ingrained into the public's consciousness (and states' and municipalities' budgets) that no one considers getting rid of this regressive tax. For the most part politicians aren't the wisest people.

Here in Atlanta we're having to replace our aging water and sewer systems. The price tag for these projects is around 4-5 billion dollars. It was decided to add a penny sales tax in the city to help pay for it. The reason being that the people who come into the city to visit and work but don't live here will be paying their share since they use these services but don't pay city taxes.

[poland74]

I didn't know pasties didn't already have VAT on anyway. I just assume everything is Vatable unless told otherwise. Is adding what, less than 20p to the cost of something worth all this fuss?

Does it really matter whether members of the government have eaten a pasty? I eat one about 5 times a year, so what.

[KernowKid]

Given that the price of a properly constituted meal sized Pasty now is around £3.20, post VAT this rises to £3.85, hence the fuss.

Suggestions seem to be being made locally that there is movement on this issue and that the proposals are likely to be somewhat different that those outlined in the Budget, which were put out 'for consultation' only with a target of October 2012 enactment. Expect a delay in implementation to April 2013 and significant changes in the scope.

[Parsifal]

Eliminate VAT and you eliminate the confusion. (Ditto for sales taxes in the US.)
VAT and sales taxes are a tax on production and thus an inhibitor of production. Plus VAT and sales taxes are basically taxes on wage earners because wage earners pay a higher proportion of their income as those taxes than do (wealthy) folks whose income is overwhelmingly from unearned income (capital gains, dividends, interest). It's basically a tax on working folks. Best to get rid of it altogether and get rid of the confusion with it.

It is not possible to get rid of VAT, as The Economist explains -

Thank you for the enlightenment.

I can only offer my condolences then.
In the states and cities in the US where we have a sales tax it is so ingrained into the public's consciousness (and states' and municipalities' budgets) that no one considers getting rid of this regressive tax. For the most part politicians aren't the wisest people.

Here in Atlanta we're having to replace our aging water and sewer systems. The price tag for these projects is around 4-5 billion dollars. It was decided to add a penny sales tax in the city to help pay for it. The reason being that the people who come into the city to visit and work but don't live here will be paying their share since they use these services but don't pay city taxes.

It's still a tax on production.

Does Atlanta already have a sales tax? If so then visitors are already paying.

If Atlanta already has a sales tax is it a one cent addition to the calculated existing tax or did you mean that it is an additional 1% on top of the existing sales tax rate?
If Atlanta doesn't already have a sales tax is it a one cent tax regardless of the purchase price or did you mean that it is a new tax with a 1% rate?
(I tried various googles and kept getting the web page cannot be opened message.)

This post has been edited by ParsifalNYC: Mar 31 2012, 23:10